Search

This is a review of the scientific literature and unpublished data that are relevant for assessing the safety of 12 Helianthus annuus (sunflower)-derived ingredients as used in cosmetics. Because final product formulations may contain multiple botanicals, each containing similar constituents of concern, formulators are advised to be aware of these constituents and to avoid levels that may be hazardous to consumers. Helianthus annuus (sunflower)-derived ingredients may contain allergens, including 2S albumins and sesquiterpene lactones. Industry should use current good manufacturing practices (cGMP) to limit impurities and constituents of concern. The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) concluded that 9 Helianthus annuus (sunflower) seed- and flower-derived ingredients are safe as used in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentration described in this safety assessment. The data are insufficient to evaluate the safety of 3 ingredients that are derived from other plant parts.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) assessed the safety of 9 Centella asiatica-derived ingredients, which reportedly function primarily as skin conditioning agents in cosmetic products. The Panel reviewed relevant data relating to the safety of these ingredients. The Panel concluded that Centella Asiatica Extract, Centella Asiatica Callus Culture, Centella Asiatica Flower/Leaf/Stem Extract, Centella Asiatica Leaf Cell Culture Extract, Centella Asiatica Leaf Extract, Centella Asiatica Leaf Water, Centella Asiatica Meristem Cell Culture, Centella Asiatica Meristem Cell Culture Extract, and Centella Asiatica Root Extract are safe in the present practices of use and concentration in cosmetics, as described in this safety assessment, when formulated to be non-sensitizing.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) reviewed the safety of 26 apple-derived ingredients, which reportedly function mostly as skin conditioning agents in cosmetic products. Because apple-derived ingredients may be obtained from different apple cultivars, the composition of ingredients derived from different cultivars should be similar to that of ingredients reviewed in this safety assessment. Additionally, industry should continue to use good manufacturing practices to limit impurities that could be present in botanical ingredients. The Panel reviewed the available data to determine the safety of these ingredients and concluded that 21 of these ingredients are safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentrations described in this safety assessment. However, the Panel also determined that the available data are insufficient to determine the safety of Pyrus Malus (Apple) Root Extract, Pyrus Malus (or Malus Domestica) (Apple) Stem Extract, Malus Domestica (Apple) Callus Extract, and Malus Domestica (Apple) Oil.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) reviewed the safety of 12 Rosa canina-derived ingredients, which are reported to function as skin conditioning agents, fragrance ingredients, cosmetic astringents, anti-acne agents, abrasives, humectants, and exfoliants in cosmetic products. Because final product formulations may contain multiple botanicals, each containing the same constituents of concern, formulators are advised to be aware of these constituents and to avoid reaching cumulative levels that may be hazardous to consumers. The Panel reviewed relevant data relating to the safety of these ingredients and concluded that these ingredients are safe in the present practices of use and concentration described in this safety assessment when formulated to be non-irritating and non-sensitizing.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) reviewed the safety of Hydrofluorocarbon 152a, which functions as a propellant in personal care products. The Panel reviewed relevant data provided in this safety assessment, and concluded that Hydrofluorocarbon 152a is safe in the present practices of use and concentration described in this safety assessment.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) reviewed the safety of 1-Hydroxyethyl 4,5-Diamino Pyrazole Sulfate, which functions as an oxidative hair dye ingredient. The Panel reviewed relevant data provided in this safety assessment, and concluded that 1-Hydroxyethyl 4,5-Diamino Pyrazole Sulfate is safe in the present practices of use and concentration in oxidative hair dye formulations.

The Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) Expert Panel (Panel) assessed the safety of 33 Citrus flower- and leaf-derived ingredients, which are most frequently reported to function in cosmetics as fragrances and/or skin-conditioning agents. The Panel reviewed the available data to determine the safety of these ingredients. Because final product formulations may contain multiple botanicals, each containing similar constituents of concern, formulators are advised to be aware of these constituents and to avoid reaching levels that may be hazardous to consumers. With Citrus flower- and leaf-derived ingredients, the Panel was concerned about the presence of the hydroperoxides of limonene and linalool in cosmetics. Industry should use good manufacturing practices to limit impurities that could be present in botanical ingredients. The Panel concluded that these ingredients are safe in the present practices of use and concentration when formulated to be non-irritating and non-sensitizing.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) reopened the safety assessment of Acid Violet 43, a cosmetic ingredient that is an anthraquinone dye reported to function in cosmetics as a colorant. This colorant has the same chemical structure as Ext. D&C Violet No. 2, which is a certified colorant; however, Acid Violet 43 is not a certified color and it could have impurities that are not allowed in the certified color. The Panel reviewed relevant new data related to this ingredient and concluded that Acid Violet 43 is safe in the present practices of use and concentration for use in hair dye formulations. This conclusion supersedes the previous conclusion for Acid Violet 43 that included impurity specifications indicated for the certified color.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) reviewed the safety of 8 keratin-derived ingredients, which function mainly as skin and hair conditioning agents in personal care products. The Panel reviewed relevant data provided in this safety assessment and concluded that the 8 keratin-derived ingredients are safe in the present practices of use and concentration described in this safety assessment.

This is a safety assessment of 40 saccharide ester ingredients as used in cosmetics. The saccharide esters are reported to function in cosmetics as emollients, skin-conditioning agents, fragrance ingredients, and emulsion stabilizers. The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) reviewed the relevant data for these ingredients. The Panel concluded that the saccharide esters are safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentrations described in this safety assessment.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) assessed the safety of 80 Citrus fruit-derived ingredients, which are most frequently reported to function in cosmetics as fragrances and/or skin-conditioning agents. The Panel reviewed the available data to determine the safety of these ingredients. Because final product formulations may contain multiple botanicals, each containing similar constituents of concern, formulators are advised to be aware of these constituents and to avoid reaching levels that may be hazardous to consumers. Industry should use good manufacturing practices to limit impurities that could be present in botanical ingredients. The Panel concluded that these ingredients are safe for use in both rinse-off and leave-on cosmetic products when formulated to be non-sensitizing and non-irritating, provided that leave-on products do not contain more than 0.0015% (15 ppm) 5-methoxypsoralen (5-MOP).

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) assessed the safety of 30 Citrus plant- and seed-derived ingredients, which are most frequently reported to function in cosmetics as fragrances and/or skin conditioning agents. Because final product formulations may contain multiple botanicals, each containing similar constituents of concern, formulators are advised to be aware of these constituents and to avoid reaching levels that may be hazardous to consumers. With Citrus plant- and seed-derived ingredients, the Panel was concerned about the presence of the hydroperoxides of limonene and linalool in cosmetics. Industry should use good manufacturing practices to limit impurities. The Panel reviewed the available data presented and concluded that 18 of these ingredients are safe in the present practices of use and concentration when formulated to be non-irritating and non-sensitizing. The data for the remaining 12 ingredients are insufficient to determine safety.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) assessed the safety of 47 Citrus peel-derived ingredients, which are most frequently reported to function in cosmetics as skin conditioning agents. The Panel reviewed the available data to determine the safety of these ingredients. Because final product formulations may contain multiple botanical ingredients, each containing similar constituents of concern, formulators are advised to be aware of these constituents and to avoid reaching levels that may be hazardous to consumers. Industry should use good manufacturing practices to limit impurities that could be present in botanical ingredients. The Panel concluded that Citrus peel-derived ingredients are safe in the present practices of use and concentration in both rinse-off and leave-on cosmetic products when formulated to be non-sensitizing and non-irritating, provided that leave-on products do not contain more than 0.0015% (15 ppm) 5-methoxypsoralen (5-MOP).

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) assessed the safety of 5 acyl sarcosines and 9 sarcosinate salts as used in cosmetics; all of these ingredients are reported to function in cosmetics as hair conditioning agents and most also can function as surfactants—cleansing agents. The ingredients reviewed in this assessment are composed of an amide comprising a fatty acyl residue and sarcosine and are either free acids or simple salts thereof. The Panel relied on relevant new data, including concentration of use, and considered data from the previous Panel report, such as the reaction of sarcosine with oxidizing materials possibly resulting in nitrosation and the formation of N-nitrososarcosine. The Panel concluded that these ingredients are safe as used in cosmetics when formulated to be non-irritating, but these ingredients should not be used in cosmetic products in which N-nitroso compounds may be formed.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) assessed the safety of 44 monoglyceryl monoesters that are structurally constituted as the esterification products of glycerin and carboxylic acids (the majority of which are fatty acids); 36 of these monoesters were previously reviewed by the Panel, and 8 are reviewed herein for the first time. Most of the monoglyceryl monoesters have several reported functions in cosmetics, but the most common function among the ingredients is skin conditioning agent; a few are reported to function only as surfactant–emulsifying agents. The Panel reviewed relevant new data, including frequency and concentration of use and considered the data from previous Cosmetic Ingredient Review reports. The Panel concluded that these ingredients are safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentration described in this safety assessment.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) assessed the safety of 46 butyl polyoxyalkylene ethers that share a common structural motif, namely a butyl chain (4 carbon alkyl chain) bound to a polyoxyalkylene (PPG, PEG, or both); 23 of these ethers were previously reviewed by the Panel, and 23 are reviewed herein for the first time. Most of the butyl polyoxyalkylene ethers have several functions in cosmetics, but the most common reported functions include hair conditioning agent and skin conditioning agent, and many reportedly function as solvents. Upon review of new data, including frequency and concentration of use, and data from previous Panel reports and on read-across analogs, the Panel concluded that these ingredients are safe in the present practices of use and concentration in cosmetics when formulated to be non-irritating.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) reviewed the safety of polyenes, which are reported to function in cosmetics primarily as film formers and viscosity increasing agents. The Panel reviewed relevant data related to these ingredients, not inggaps in the available safety data for some of the polyenes in this safety assessment. The data available for many of the ingredients are sufficient and can be extrapolated to support the safety of the entire group because of the similarities in the chemical structures, chemical properties, use concentrations, and reported functions across the group. The Panel concluded that polyenes were safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentration described in this safety assessment.

This is a safety assessment of glycerin as used in cosmetics. Glycerin functions as a denaturant, fragrance ingredient, hair conditioning agent, humectant, oral care agent, oral health-care drug, skin protectant, skin conditioning agent—humectant, and viscosity-decreasing agent. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel (Panel) reviewed relevant animal and human data. The Panel concluded that glycerin is safe as a cosmetic ingredient in the practices of use and concentration described in this safety assessment.

This is a safety assessment of Avena sativa (oat)–derived ingredients. The reported functions of these ingredients in cosmetics include abrasives, antioxidant, skin conditioning agents, absorbents, and bulking agents. The Panel reviewed relevant animal and human data related to these ingredients. Because final product formulations may contain multiple botanicals, each containing the same constituents of concern, formulators are advised to be aware of these constituents and to avoid reaching levels that may lead to sensitization or other toxic effects. The Panel stated that industry should continue to use good manufacturing practices to limit impurities and concluded that all but one of the Avena sativa (oat)–derived ingredients are safe as cosmetic ingredients in the practices of use and concentration described in this safety assessment when formulated to be nonsensitizing; data are insufficient to come to a conclusion of safety for Avena Sativa (Oat) Meristem Cell Extract.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) reviewed the safety of inorganic hydroxides, which function in cosmetics primarily as pH adjusters. Representatives from the cosmetic industry have indicated these ingredients are used in depilating and hair waving/straightening formulations to raise pH values. The Panel considered relevant data related to these ingredients. The Panel concluded that these inorganic hydroxides are safe in hair straighteners and depilatories under conditions of recommended use; users should minimize skin contact. These ingredients are safe for all other present practices of use and concentration described in this safety assessment when formulated to be nonirritating.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) assessed the safety of Phosphoric Acid and its salts (31 ingredients), which are reported to function as buffering agents, corrosion inhibitors, chelating agents, and pH adjusters in cosmetic products. The Panel reviewed data relating to the safety of these ingredients and concluded that Phosphoric Acid and its salts are safe in the present practices of use and concentration in cosmetics when formulated to be nonirritating.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) reopened the safety assessment of Sodium Sulfate, a cosmetic ingredient that is an inorganic salt reported to function in cosmetics as a viscosity increasing agent—aqueous. The Panel reviewed the relevant new data for the ingredient, including frequency of use and concentration of use, and considered data from the previous Panel assessment. The Panel concluded that Sodium Sulfate is safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentrations described in this safety assessment when formulated to be nonirritating.

The Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel (Panel) reassessed the safety of 2-pyrrolidone-5-carboxylic acid (PCA) and sodium PCA; the Panel added 3 previously unreviewed salts (calcium, magnesium, and potassium) of PCA to this safety assessment. 2-Pyrrolidone-5-carboxylic acid and its salts are reported to function in cosmetics as skin conditioning agents—humectants. The Panel reviewed the data from the 1999 report of PCA and sodium PCA, as well as additional data included in this report, to determine the safety of these ingredients. The Panel concluded that PCA and its salts are safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentration; additionally, these ingredients should not be used in cosmetic products in which N-nitroso compounds can be formed.

The Expert Panel assessed the safety of 28 alkyl phosphates and concluded that these ingredients are safe in the current practices of use and concentration when formulated to be nonirritating. The ingredients in the alkyl phosphate family share a common phosphate core structure, and vary by the identity of the alkyl chains attached therein. Most of the alkyl phosphates function as surfactants in cosmetic ingredients; however, the triesters function as plasticizers rather than surfactants. The Panel reviewed the available animal and clinical data to determine the safety of these ingredients.

The Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel (Panel) reviewed the safety of methylisothiazolinone (MI), which functions as a preservative. The Panel reviewed relevant animal and human data provided in this safety assessment and in a previously published safety assessment of MI and concluded that MI is safe for use in rinse-off cosmetic products at concentrations up to 100 ppm and safe in leave-on cosmetic products when they are formulated to be nonsensitizing, which may be determined based on a quantitative risk assessment.

The Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel (Panel) assessed the safety of 25 monosaccharides, disaccharides, and related ingredients and concluded these are safe in the present practices of use and concentration described in the safety assessment. Many of these ingredients are common dietary sugars, dietary sugar replacements, or very closely related analogs and salts; 7 of the ingredients are listed by the Food and Drug Administration as generally recognized as safe food substances. The most commonly reported cosmetic function is as a skin-conditioning agent; other commonly reported functions are use as a humectant or as a flavoring agent. The Panel reviewed the animal and clinical data included in this assessment, acknowledged that the oral safety of many of these ingredients has been well established, and found it appropriate to extrapolate the existing information to conclude on the safety of all the monosaccharides, disaccharides, and related ingredients.

The Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) Expert Panel (Panel) reviewed the safety of barium sulfate, which functions as an opacifying agent in cosmetic products and is being used at concentrations up to 0.99% and 37% in rinse-off and leave-on products, respectively. The Panel noted that the history of safe medical use of barium sulfate indicates no significant toxicity concerns relating to systemic exposure to this ingredient. Furthermore, the extensive clinical experience of the Panel, including the results of numerous patch tests, indicates that barium salts do not have the potential to induce sensitization. The Panel noted that since salts of sulfuric acid can be irritating to the skin, cosmetic products containing barium sulfate should be formulated to be nonirritating. The Panel concluded that barium sulfate is safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentration described in this safety assessment when formulated to be nonirritating.

Tripeptide-1, Hexapeptide-12, their metal salts and fatty acyl derivatives, and Palmitoyl Tetrapeptide-7 function primarily as skin conditioning agents, and Palmitoyl Tripeptide-1, Palmitoyl Hexapeptide-12, Tripeptide-1, Copper Tripeptide-1, and Palmitoyl Tetrapeptide-7 are also used in cosmetic products. Typical use concentrations of these ingredients are

Pentaerythrityl tetra-di -t-butyl hydroxyhydrocinnamate functions as an antioxidant in cosmetic products and is used at concentrations up to 0.8%. Given the high molecular weight of this ingredient, skin penetration is not likely. The available toxicity data, together with the low ingredient use concentrations, suggest that systemic toxicity would not be likely if percutaneous absorption were to occur. Additionally, the negative human repeated insult patch test data at a concentration of 0.5% were deemed sufficient for evaluating the skin irritation and sensitization potential of pentaerythrityl tetra-di -t-butyl hydroxyhydrocinnamate over the range of use concentrations in cosmetic products. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel concluded that pentaerythrityl tetra-di -t-butyl hydroxyhydrocinnamate is safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentration described in this safety assessment.

The Chamomilla recutita-derived ingredients in this assessment are reported to function mostly as fragrance ingredients and skin conditioning agents in cosmetic products. Because final product formulations may contain multiple botanicals, each containing the same constituents of concern, formulators are advised to be aware of these constituents and to avoid reaching levels that may be hazardous to consumers. Additionally, industry should continue to use good manufacturing practices to limit impurities that could be present in botanical ingredients. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel concluded that the Chamomilla recutita-derived ingredients are safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentration described in the safety assessment when formulated to be nonsensitizing.

The Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel (Panel) assessed the safety of 10 Rosmarinus officinalis (rosemary)-derived ingredients and concluded these ingredients are safe as used in cosmetics when formulated to be nonsensitizing. The R officinalis-derived ingredients are most frequently reported to function in cosmetics as skin conditioning agents or as fragrance ingredients. The Panel reviewed the available animal and clinical data to determine the safety of these ingredients. Because final product formulations may contain multiple botanicals, each containing the same constituents of concern, formulators are advised to be aware of these constituents and to avoid reaching levels that may be hazardous to consumers. Industry should continue to use good manufacturing practices to limit impurities that could be present in botanical ingredients.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) assessed the safety of 6 trimellitic anhydride copolymers as used in cosmetics. These ingredients are related as copolymers in that they all share trimellitic anhydride (ie, 1,2,4-benzenetricarboxylic acid anhydride) as a monomer, are reported to function as film formers in cosmetics, and are reported to be primarily used in nail products. Very limited safety data were available or submitted. The Panel concluded that Adipic Acid/Neopentyl Glycol/Trimellitic Anhydride Copolymer and Phthalic Anhydride/Trimellitic Anhydride/Glycols Copolymer are safe in nail product formulations in the present practices of use and concentration, but the data are insufficient to make a determination of safety on the use of these 2 ingredients in all other types of cosmetic formulations. The Panel also concluded that the available data are insufficient to make a determination that the remaining trimellitic anhydride copolymers are safe for use in cosmetic formulations.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) reviewed the safety of ceramides, which function in cosmetics primarily as hair-conditioning agents and skin-conditioning agents—miscellaneous. The Panel considered relevant data related to these ingredients. The Panel concluded that ceramides were safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentration described in this safety assessment.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) reviewed the safety of Hydrolyzed Silk and 9 other silk protein ingredients, which function primarily as skin and hair conditioning agents and bulking agents in cosmetic products. The Panel reviewed relevant data relating to the safety of these ingredients and concluded that 8 ingredients are safe in the present practices of use and concentration in cosmetics, as described in this safety assessment, but that the available data are insufficient for determining the safety of 2 silk protein ingredients in cosmetic products, MEA-Hydrolyzed Silk and Silkworm Cocoon Extract.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) assessed the safety of 60 PEGylated alkyl glycerides. PEGylated alkyl glycerides are mono-, di-, and/or triglycerides that have been modified with ethylene glycol repeat units (in the starting material form as epoxide). Most of the PEGylated alkyl glycerides are reported to function as skin-conditioning agents or surfactants. The Panel reviewed the available animal and clinical data as well as data from the 1999 report for the 5 polyethylene glycol (PEG) glyceryl cocoates and the 2012 report of PEGylated oils, to determine the safety of these ingredients. The Panel concluded these ingredients are safe in the current practices of use and concentration when formulated to be nonirritating; this conclusion supersedes the 1999 conclusion issued on 5 PEG glyceryl cocoate ingredients.

The phosphoglycerides considered in this safety assessment are reported to function primarily as skin and hair conditioning agents, emulsifying agents, and surfactants in cosmetic products and are used up to a maximum reported concentration of 50%. Although phospholipids exert physiologic effects, these are not reproduced by application of phospholipid ingredients to the skin. Given the possibility that Lecithin may be derived from animal sources, it should be noted that the Food and Drug Administration does not permit the use of ingredients made from bovine specified risk materials in cosmetic products. The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety concluded that the 17 phosphoglycerides are safe in the present practices of use and concentration in cosmetics, as described in this safety assessment.

The Expert Panel for Cosmetic Ingredient Safety (Panel) reviewed the safety of 2-Amino-3-Hydroxypyridine, which is reported to function as an oxidative hair dye ingredient. The Panel reviewed relevant animal and human data provided in this safety assessment, and concluded that 2-Amino-3-Hydroxypyridine is safe in the present practices of use and concentration for use in oxidative hair dye formulations.

The Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel assessed the safety of 47 polyethylene glycols (PEGs) cocamine and related ingredients, which are reported to function mostly as surfactants and antistatic agents. The Panel reviewed the relevant data and developed a framework to satisfy previously identified data deficiencies for this group of materials as well as extend the scope of related materials covered by the analysis. The irritation potential of these ingredients is consistent with the surface active properties that are characteristic of surfactants. The Panel concluded that the PEGs cocamine and related ingredients were safe as ingredients in cosmetic formulations in the current practices of use and concentration when formulated to be nonirritating.

The Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) Expert Panel (Panel) assessed the safety of 33

The Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) is a nonprofit program to assess the safety of ingredients in personal care products in an open, unbiased, and expert manner. Cosmetic Ingredient Review was established in 1976 by the Personal Care Products Council (PCPC), with the support of the US Food and Drug Administration (USFDA) and the Consumer Federation of America (CFA). Cosmetic Ingredient Review remains the only scientific program in the world committed to the systematic, independent review of cosmetic ingredient safety in a public forum. Cosmetic Ingredient Review operates in accordance with procedures modeled after the USFDA process for reviewing over-the-counter drugs. Nine voting panel members are distinguished, such as medical professionals, scientists, and professors. Three nonvoting liaisons are designated by the USFDA, CFA, and PCPC to represent government, consumer, and industry, respectively. The annual rate of completing safety assessments accelerated from about 100 to more than 400 ingredients by implementing grouping and read-across strategies and other approaches. As of March 2017, CIR had reviewed 4,740 individual cosmetic ingredients, including 4,611 determined to be safe as used or safe with qualifications, 12 determined to be unsafe, and 117 ingredients for which the information is insufficient to determine safety. Examples of especially challenging safety assessments and issues are presented here, including botanicals. Cosmetic Ingredient Review continues to strengthen its program with the ongoing cooperation of the USFDA, CFA, the cosmetics industry, and everyone else interested in contributing to the process.

Formic acid functions as a fragrance ingredient, preservative, and pH adjuster in cosmetic products, whereas sodium formate functions as a preservative. Because of its acidic properties, formic acid is a dermal and ocular irritant. However, when used as a pH adjuster in cosmetic formulations, formic acid will be neutralized to yield formate salts, for example, sodium formate, thus minimizing safety concerns. Formic acid and sodium formate have been used at concentrations up to 0.2% and 0.34%, respectively, with hair care products accounting for the highest use concentrations of both ingredients. The low use concentrations of these ingredients in leave-on products and uses in rinse-off products minimize concerns relating to skin/ocular irritation or respiratory irritation potential. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel concluded that formic acid and sodium formate are safe in the present practices of use and concentration in cosmetics, when formulated to be nonirritating.

The Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel (Panel) reviewed the safety of methyl glucose polyethers and esters which function in cosmetics as skin/hair-conditioning agents, surfactants, or viscosity increasing agents. The esters included in this assessment are mono-, di-, or tricarboxyester substituted methyl glucosides, and the polyethers are mixtures of various chain lengths. The Panel reviewed available animal and clinical data, including the molecular weights, log Kows, and other properties in making its determination of safety on these ingredients. Where there were data gaps, similarities between molecular structures, physicochemical and biological characteristics, and functions and concentrations in cosmetics allowed for extrapolation of the available toxicological data to assess the safety of the entire group. The Panel concluded that there likely would be no significant systemic exposure from cosmetic use of these ingredients, and that these ingredients are safe in cosmetic formulations in the present practices of use and concentration.

The Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel assessed the safety of 14 citrus-derived peel oil ingredients and concluded that these ingredients are safe for use in cosmetic products when finished products, excluding rinse-off products, do not contain more than 0.0015% (15 ppm) 5-methoxypsoralen, and when formulated to be nonsensitizing and nonirritating. The citrus-derived peel oil ingredients are most frequently reported to function in cosmetics as fragrances and/or skin conditioning agents. The Panel reviewed the available animal and clinical data to determine the safety of these ingredients. Because final product formulations may contain multiple botanicals, each containing the same constituents of concern, formulators are advised to be aware of these constituents and to avoid reaching levels that may be hazardous to consumers. Industry should use good manufacturing practices to limit impurities that could be present in botanical ingredients.

The Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel (Panel) assessed the safety of 20 sorbitan esters; this report included sorbitan esters that were reviewed in 1985 and 2002, as well as 3 previously unreviewed sorbitan esters (sorbitan undecylenate, sorbitan sesquicaprylate, and sorbitan palmate). Most of the sorbitan esters are reported to function in cosmetics as surfactant-emulsifying agents. The Panel reviewed the data from previous sorbitan ester reports, as well as additional data included in this report, to determine the safety of these ingredients. The Panel concluded that the sorbitan esters included in this safety assessment are safe in cosmetics in the present practices of use and concentration.

The Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel (Panel) reviewed the safety of fatty acid amidopropyl dimethylamines, which function primarily as antistatic agents in cosmetic products. The relevant animal and human data reviewed for these ingredients indicate that they are potential dermal sensitizers that may be due in part by the sensitizing impurity, 3,3-dimethylaminopropylamine. The Panel concluded that fatty acid amidopropyl dimethylamines were safe as cosmetic ingredients when they are formulated to be nonsensitizing, which may be based on a quantitative risk assessment.

The Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) Expert Panel (Panel) reviewed the safety of tromethamine, aminomethyl propanediol, and aminoethyl propanediolas used in cosmetics. All 3 ingredients are reported to function in cosmetics as pH adjusters, and tromethamine and aminomethyl propanediol are also reported to function as fragrance ingredients. The Panel reviewed relevant animal and human data related to these ingredients, along with a previous safety assessment of aminomethyl propanediol. The Panel concluded that tromethamine, aminomethyl propanediol, and aminoethyl propanediol are safe in cosmetics in the practices of use and concentration as given in this safety assessment.

Anthemis nobilis (Roman chamomile) flower extract, anthemis nobilis flower oil, anthemis nobilis flower powder, and anthemis nobilis flower water are ingredients that function as fragrance ingredients and skin-conditioning agents in cosmetic products. These ingredients are being used at concentrations up to 10% (anthemis nobilis flower water) in cosmetic products. The available data indicate that these 4 ingredients are not irritating or sensitizing. Chemical composition data and the low use concentrations suggest that systemic toxicity would not be likely if percutaneous absorption of constituents were to occur. Formulations may contain more than 1 botanical ingredient; each may contribute to the final concentration of a single component. Manufacturers were cautioned to avoid reaching levels of plant constituents that may cause sensitization or other adverse effects. Industry should continue to use good manufacturing practices to limit impurities in the ingredient before blending into cosmetic formulations. The Expert Panel concluded that these ingredients are safe in the present practices of use and concentration in cosmetics, when formulated to be nonsensitizing.

This is a safety assessment of alumina and aluminum hydroxide as used in cosmetics. Alumina functions as an abrasive, absorbent, anticaking agent, bulking agent, and opacifying agent. Aluminum hydroxide functions as a buffering agent, corrosion inhibitor, and pH adjuster. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) evaluated the safe use of alumina in several medical devices and aluminum hydroxide in over-the-counter drugs, which included a review of human and animal safety data. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) Expert Panel considered the FDA evaluations as part of the basis for determining the safety of these ingredients as used in cosmetics. Alumina used in cosmetics is essentially the same as that used in medical devices. This safety assessment does not include metallic or elemental aluminum as a cosmetic ingredient. The CIR Expert Panel concluded that alumina and aluminum hydroxide are safe in the present practices of use and concentration described in this safety assessment.

7 immunochemical methods are currently available for measuring human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) which is secreted during pregnancy reaching its highest level during the 1st trimester: 1) latex agglutination inhibition (LAI) 2) hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) 3) direct latex agglutination (DLA) and 4) radioimmunoassay (RIA). In a study of 5 commercial immunochemical pregnancy kits it was concluded that the HAI kits were more accurate and sensitive than the LAI or DLA kits. The need for a standardized transferrable analytical method for evaluating kit performance was expressed by the Food and Drug Administration and by increased over-the-counter sales of these products. This paper presents protocols developed for testing the performance of these kits including the following aspects: accuracy and sensitivity determination test procedures for HAI LAI and DLA apparatus and reagents. A test was performed on 206 assorted lots of kits with the following results: 1) none of the 98 HAI kits gave false positive or false negative results 2) the LAI kits gave 24 false and 3 inconclusive results 3) the mean level of HCG detected by HAI kits was below that obtained with LAI and DLA kits; thus the HAI detects pregnancy at an earlier stage 4) average sensitivity of all kits tested was greater than or equal to that claimed by the manufacturer 5) denaturation of the antisera may enhance the sensitivity and given an increase of false positive reactions 6) low concentrations or HCG standard in dilute solutions were unstable due to absorption of HCG on glass surfaces 7) erroneous results can be caused by HCG secreted in hydatidiform moles choriocarcinoma and certain tumors ectopic pregnancy and protein in the urine 8) data from repeat analyses could be misleading and 9) reagents should be visually inspected before use to detect bad reagents.